The Indianapolis journal., 1903-05-09
FINES ALMOST CEASED
IN 1900 SWEEPING WAS PROFITABLE
FOR ALL CONCERNED.
MIR. Fuehring Tells Of His Talk with
II. B. Gates About Sweeping
COniract-Other Features.


required to furnish. He denied that any
of this went TO Stuckmeyer. He admitted
that this amounted during the course OF
nine months to about S1.5oo He said the
laborers were not paid when rain prevented
their working and that Stuckmeyer did not
draw pay for them when rain prevented
work.
PAY FOR RAINY DAYS.
What would you say If the records of
the board showed that Stuckmeyer had
drawn pay for rainy days?" asked Mr..
Noel.
Fuehring was positive that Stuckmeyer
had not done this. but he admitted. after
much equivocation. during which Mr. Noel
became very angry that he did not know
what the records might show.
did you feel in 1900 that the administra-
ton was forcing you TO take Stuckmeyer
into the contract?"
II thought if there was any thrashing
Stuckmeyer would have to take it,
He said he believed Stuckmeyer's inter-
est in the business purely business one.
He said he knew Stuckmeyer was Close
Did Furnas tell you he had been TO see
Taggart and Taggart had told him he must
take Stuckmeyer in?
mo, sir
Fuehring said he had made profit OF
about cents on the work at II cents.
In 1902 Fuehring said he bid. through
Il
the contract was awarded to the Marion
County Construction Company for 10 cents
Mr. Noel then asked Fuehring TO tell his
story of his negotiations with harry Is
Gates.
Fuehring said he was told by Furnas
that he (Furnas) had been called 10 Gates
office the day preceding and that Gates had
asked him TO bring Fired" around. The
witness and Furnas visited Gates Gates
told them he was willing 10 go In with
them as a secret partner; that he could
n fhpra lnr M
TO become q member OF the Board OF fuD-
lie Works. but that the papers had talked
and the mayor had told him he had better
not go on Gates, Fuehring said. told him
ne had nominated Bookwalter and helped
to elect him. and that If there was not not
enough in the 10000 appropriated for the
work he would see that they got more.
A FOURTH INTEREST.
Fuehring said Gates said he wanted TO
purchase a fourth interest in the business
Nothing was said by either Gates. Furnas
or the witness about a salary Of $500 or
any other amount TO be paid to Gates.
Gates said he wanted TO take Stuckmeyer's
place Fuehring said he did not relish kick
ing Stuckmeyer out after he had been
good partner.
Fuehring said he asked Gates how he
would know that Furnas and the witness
did not cheat him out of his share Gates.
Fuehring testified, said In reply; Mein
freund, 1 will trust you for everything.
He tapped Fuehring on the arm.
Gates, Fuehring testified, said he was go
ing TO Buffalo with Mayor Bookwalter TO
the national bowling tournament OF lSz
and would talk the matter over with him
on the trip.
He said he first learned that Gates was
interested In ,a the Marion Sennty ~ fSpany tSa
pany, paid him for ten wagons and forty
horses which he sold TO the company. Sci
bert said he would pay him Tor the wagons e1,s
xarha MI
''noneyed man" would be home the follow
ing day at o'clock. Fuehring said he had
a friend telephone to Gates's Office and was
told that Gates would be home Friday
morning at o. clock.
Fuehring said he did not go with Furnas
Sw to see 20 Al ask Sm TO- bid for the Of
1902 He said he did not personally know
Middleton, but had been told by Furnas
who he was.
Mr Ketcham conducted a fiery cross-ex-
animation of Fuehring. IL was intended to
show that throughout all the transactions
Fuehring had with Remington about the
money 10 be paid TO Logsdon in 1902 and
this year that he had not told bennington
he was dishonest nor hap he told Logsdon
of what Remington was saying. Asked
why he did not go TO Logsdon and ask him
IL what Remington was saying aDoIt h1ul
was true. he replied that he didn't consider
IL his business to do So Mr.. ketcham
asked about the drop in sprinkling prices
from s4g in 1881 TO $40 in 1899 and the in
crease to s24 in 1900 Mr. Ketcham exam.
signed since 1896. The witness answered In
all cases that the affidavit of noncollusion
was true because he did not believe he was
in a combination He said IL was an ''ar-
rangement" He said there was no agree
ment IS TO prices. but merely the arrange
ment'' TO divide the work.
DID NOT KNOW 1T.
Don't you know that when you made the
affidavit OF 1900 that you were telling a
faIsehood. and that there was a combination
to increase the price?''
mo. sir Fuehrsng then explained that
in that year in narrowing the sprinklng
width of the streets had caused all the con-
tractors To bid high because the work pre-
sented an '.experment" The next year
the contractors knew more about the "ex-
pertinent" and prices dropped.
Fuehring said he had known Logsdon for
a couple of years. and that their relations
had always been pleasant He said he had
no bitterness because he had been forced.
by the circumstances. out OF both the sweep
ing and spTinkling business. He said he had
no reason 10 believe Logsdon dishonest exc
cept what Remington had told him.
Mr.. Matson examined Fuehring 10 show
that In 1902 when Remington was asking
Remington got the contract and nothing
was paid. and that the same opportunity
existed this year IL the other contractors
got the work. Fuehring said ne felt con-
fdent when Rust was In the transaction he
would not permit any corrupt payment
the affidavit he made at Charles Martin
dales Office and 10 the bidding this year.
The committee will resume the inyestigns
tion Monday evening.