The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-04-24

sons not now summoned as witnesses anu
who happened to be. in the room might be
required by him. He said he did not lntenu
TO confine his work to those he had ALREADY
summoned. Mr.. Ketcham said there should
be no educating process and that all VIII
nesses, whether summoned or Lot, should
be excluded or the purpose OF separation
would not be accomplished The stenog-
rapher, Walter Carpenter, was sworn oy
Justice Smock who also administered the
oath TO William Fuehring, Fred W. Fueh-
ring, Frank Remington, Charles Roepks9'
Conrad Rust, F. w. Noting and John ii.
Furnas all the witnesses summoned. They
were sent to the witness room. where they
were kept until nearly II o'clock.
Remington was called TO the stand. de
testified under Mr.. Noers examination,
that he lived at 1905 South Delaware street
was twenty-seven years old, son OF Hoo-
ert Remington, and had been sprlnkllng
contractor since 1896. He explained that
the sprinkling contracts were all based on
what is termed a great square -IO,vVO
square feet. equal to about one city block
of street width In 1896 he said the con-
tract was let by districts and the price was
$27 for two sprinkings and SIS for three
sprinklings per 10000 feet. In tnat year
the payments were made for the full width
of the street. In the year following Iney
were cut down TO sprinkllng wldth
averaging twenty-four feet, The ave averaSe age
area was about cut in half. In that year
he had West Indianapolis. bidding Slb:iO LOT
two and $40 for three sprinklings; In 1850
he had West Indianapolis and Districts
5 and 5, west of West street, and the price
IVES sol for two and SD for three sprink-
lings. In 1899 he went in with Conrad Rust
and under the name of Rust & Remington
bid for all the districts in the city at Sz'
for two and s2S for three sprinkiings.
SECURED THE CONTRACT.
They got the contract. There were other
bidders, all higher. In that year all the
| contractors who had bid for districts-the
Fuehrings, the Noltings and Roepke-had
districts. Remington gave bond for S2o,coO'
with the Fuehrings as surety, and the city
| paid all the money to him. He paid the
subcontractors according to their districts
"You cashed the warrants and paid them
the money!"
"Yes, sir.''
"Did you retain any part of the money
due them2"
"I did not"
"You sublet the work of certain districts
to them and got nothing for it,
'T did not"
Remington said he was not able to do
all the work himself and had to divide
among those who could do it. Mr.. Noel
| questioned him closely about the relations
| of the contractors in the preceding two
| years. Remington testified they had nat
sometimes at his house, other times at
| Rust's to divide up the work and bid so
| that those who were intended to get the
work should get 1t. They had succeeded
| for two years in this practice. The reason
| of this was that there was no one able to
| take the contract for the whole city with
| out depending on the others
work got together and formed a combina-
t%ion?" % - s,o,,,a ,.vo
| certain districts"
| You knew what the bids were to be as
to the different portions, didn't your
| "Yes, sir
"Then you did have combination?"
"Then If you had a combination previous
| to 1899 and had been able to dictate prices
| to the city why did you bid for the whole
die it?"
"AlI the sprinkling contractors got to-
gether and agreed to make the bid"
Were there other bidders?'
| az F. Reeder bid, believe"
"Was he member of the trust?"
HE was not"
"Who were the members?'
Fred and William Fuehring, Fred and
Henry Noting. Conrad Rust, Charles
| Roepke and myself"
| Remington said Reeder did not get the
| contract because he did not bid low enough.
/ CONTROLLED 1T FOR TEN YEARS.
Mr.. Noel pressed this examination close
ly. Remington said the contractors he
named had been able to control the price
of sprinkling in this city for ten years be-
| CduSc tuSIS was lo olc cisc picpdiCu "
| do the work. The bids. he said so
fixed that the work would go to the men,
| bers of this trust" 1t required explicit
| questioning from Mr.. Noel to disclose these
| facts, but he clung to every point until
he had a direct answer. Remington said
he had refused to bid with the other MEM
bers of the trust on this years contract.
| The number of members was increased by
| the addition of John H. Furnas, he testi-
| fed
''I will ask you." said Mr.. Noel, 'why
Rust & Remington bid in 1899, reminding
| you that you have testified that there was
| no competition in preceding years for the
| districts
| Mr.. Ketcham here interposed an objec-
| ton, saying that Mr.. Noel was asking the
| witness a question which misstated the
facts. Mr.. Noel jumped to his feet and
told the committee that he would object
| to any interruption from Mr.. Ketcham ex-
| cept on a pertinent matter. Mr. Ketcham
said he thought the matter pertinent. as
| Noel had made a misstatement of fact.
Mr.. Noel said the witness could correct
| that himself.
Chairman Wynne said he saw no reason
why the question should not be answered
and Remington answered that the bid was
made to keep prices up, there had been
| competition before. Robert Thomas, 1. F.
Reeder and George w. McCray had bid
| against the combination in other years
Remington said the combination able
to control the price In 1900, when the con-
for three sprinklings. He denied that re-
| yTTN or IN TST,r