The San Francisco call., 1898-03-10
Gave Damaging Testi- mony Against the Har-
 Dor Commission.
Liqht Thrown on the Way in Which Waterfront Con-
 tracts Were Let.
The Commissioners Meet With a Set back in Attempting to IrnPeach
 D. H. Bibb.


 as a witness for the defense in the ln- Junction suit brought by the Paraf1lne Paint Company against the State Board of Harbor Commissioners. He proved anything but valuable witness for the defendants. Although he was put short time on the witness-stand, he threw a flood of light on the way bus mess has been conducted on the har" bor front
 Attorney F. S. Stratton was recalled to the stand. when Judge Belcher re- convened court yesterday morning, ana wass cross s-examined at great length by Attorney Matt I. Sullivan Of counsel for the Paraffine Paint Company. He told of the legal advice he had gwen the Harbor Commissioners concerning the opening of bids after the time ad- vertised in the proposals, and explained in detail the connection he had with the lumber companies that were m terested in the suits brought against the board several months prior to the action now being tried. The other suits were dismissed on terms satls- factory to both sides of the litigation. Stratton testified that he had never been apprised of the terms ot settle- IneUl anu ndQ dlWdyS UCCihA4ON - S any advice to the board in the matter of the payment of the contested pllIS that first brought about the present legal controversy He admitted nav ing been consulted by the Slade LurIl- Der Company relative to It's contract, but said that he had never adVlseo the Board of Harbor CommlsslonerS on the matter of the payment or the pllls presented. Stratton said that he had Ia t1 his legal ri2nIS anu having done so declined to advise the Commissioners. He testified Tn conciu- sion that the Commissioners were lu,Iy apprised of his consultations Wllh the representatives of the Slade colnpdhy and that for that reason he was not asked to give the comnilssion auT te ios on matters in which both the lumber company and Commissioners were ln- tereSted.
 William Inglis was next called as a witness by Stratton for the purpose or impeaching a portion of the damaglhg testimony given by D. H. Bibb against the contract-letting methods or the Board of Harbor Commissioners. Inglis testified that he knew Commls- sioner Colnon between fifteen and SIX teen years. and that he had known Ribb about ten years He testified that he spoke to Commissioner Colnon soon 1 after the latter's appointment relative | to securing contract Tor furnlshlhS | all the lumber required by the Harpor 1 Commissioners. Commissioner chad l bourne was present at the time. Col non told him that Bibb was looking for a portion of the same business and that 1 he had better consult with Bibb. The l following day he telephoned to Bibb and made an engagement to meet hlm | in his office. When they met and dis l cuSSed the lumber contract BlDD Sald | that he wanted it all to himself. Inglis replied that he wanted at least half or | the work, and Bibb refused to listen to l him. Two days later Bibb visited him l and told him that he had changed his l mind. Bibb said that he understood | Inglis had "a pulp with the Harbor 1 Commissioners, and that If he Qnglis) would exert that pull he would give him one-quarter of the contract for fur | nishing lumber.
 T refused to accept the proposition" 1 testified Inglis, and we separated. l | told him that I did not have a pull, but that l intended trying to get the contract. The next day Bibb visited 1 me again and said that he would l equally share the contract with me, if l it could be secured, on the condition that I gave the teaming work to his | father-in-law."
 Did you ever demand a position at $250 month from Bibb?" asked Attor- ney Stratton.
 | No, sir" replied the witness. | Attorney Cope then took IngliS in | hand and croSS-eXamined him concern | ing his acquaintance with Colnon. He | said that he had been friendly with Colnon for years; in fact they had been neighbors at Stockton. He also ad- mitted that his father was one of the sureties on Colnons bond.
 Do you know s. E. Slade?" inter- rupted Attorney Stratton.
 II do," replied Inglis.
 Did you ever enter into an agree ment with him?" asked Stratton.
 Yes, sir answered the witness.
 Now kindly give us the facts con- corning that agreement" said Cope.
 1nglis in response said that Slade came to him relative to securing the contract for furnishing the Harbor l Commissioners with the lumber re- quired for wharf repair and exten- l sionS. Slade told him that he could fur nish half of the lumber and take all of the profits accruing from that half of the contract. if the witness could Se cure 1t. The contract was, however, to be in Slade's name, and he was to handle all of the lumber.
 Have you a lumber yard?" asked Cope.
 No, sir
 | was all or the lumber to De fur- nished by Slade?'
 No, sir," answered Inglis. ''I in- tended getting my half of the lumber from Portland"
 Did Slade get the contract?"
 He got a contract for six months, '' answered Inglis. T had previously re- ported the matter to the Commission ers.
 Did you furnish any of the lumber?
 No, sir" replied the witness. My agreement with Slade was afterward changed. He furnished the lumber and paid me $200 month."
 Did you do anything in return fol the money?"
 "Oh, yes" answered Inglis. T work ed around the yard tallying lumber and assisted in overseeing the loading of g schooner
 The testimony of Inglis proved o1 great interest to the plaintiffs coun- sel inasmuch as Slade when on tht witness stand several weeks ago testi fled that he had employed Inglis simp ly because he thought him good man.