The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1904-08-06
Referee Ferry Decides i'm Favor
OF Rock Island.
Mccarthy and Reiehardt Failed
to Establish Their Claim.
100000 INVOLVED.
Controversy Over Payment for
Al Miles of Grade.
Taking of Testimony Requires
Three Months Session.

L. S. Ferry, referee from the Shaw
nee county district court in the suit of
Mccarthy and Reichardt, contractors.
for a Judgment of S134,0 against the
st. Louis, Kansas City and Colorado
Railway company, the Missouri branch
of the Rock Island, on Friday afternoon
reported TO the attorneys interested in
the case that he had allowed the
contractors $50, 400 of the amount sued
for. To this sum the railroad company
had made confession. The decision was
a distinct victory for the Rock Island,
the judgment being more than 100000
less than the amount sued for.
Mccarthy and Re1chardt are railroad
contractors from Little Rock, Arkansas
They had a contract to construct fl
miles of the St. Louis, Kansas City and
Colorado railroad, beginning at Union,
Mo, and working west. They claimed
In their petition that Chief Engineer
III. L. Marvin of the Rock Island road
had under estimated and under CLASH
fed the work done, they being paid but
Is cents per cubic yard for earth eXca-
walton, IS cents for loose rocS excaVa-
ton and 65 cents for solid rock excava-
tion.
John Mcclure of Little Rock and
Rossington, Smith and Histed were the
attorneys for the plaintiffs and w +.
Evans and J. ". Gleed for the defend
ant.
The suit was filed December 10, of
last year. and is the largest which has
ever been before the Shawnee county
district court. Judge Hazen appointed
/. $. Ferry as referee and he has spent
almost three months in taking testi-
mony. The evidence consisted of over
$500 typewriter pages and when bound
made eight complete volumes. J. X.
Wick was the stenographer appointed
by the referee.
1t appears from the testimony that
there were differences between con-
tractors and the railroad engineers con-
corning the estimates. Several times
outside engineers were called in tomake
third party classifications, but 1t
was impossible for the interested TO
reach an agreement After that mat
tiers came to a Standstill for little
while, when the railroad confessed
Judgment to $50 900, for an error in es-
timating grabbing and clearing. but
this too failed TO settle the controversy |
The case then came into court and
request was made for a referee. L. 5. |
Ferry was appointed.
The contractors charged Chief Eng1- |
neer Marvin with being incapable This |
is the courts conclusion on that point: |
THAT no evidence has been produced !
in this action sustaining the charge in |
plaintiffs petition that said Chief Engi- |
neer Marvin was incapable. inefficient |
or unfair, or that he was incapable by |
reason of old age, physical infirmities, |
prejudice OF unfair disposition 10 prop
erly and fairly perform his duties as |
chief engineer of said railroad company |
under the provisions of said contract" |
In placing Judgment upon the whole |
matter, Referee Ferry SubstantiateS the /
company's estimate by the con-
clusion thus: 1.-The final estimate and |
certificate of said Engineer H. L. Mar
win is correct as except as to the cler-
lcal error showing the clearing ana |
grubbing. and shows correctly the
and quantities of earth,
loose rock and solid rock excavation
made by said plaintiffs under said con-
tract