Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-09-07

knew this, and either ordered 1t or approved
or acquiesced in 1t there is controversy.
Inc inspectors testify that ne directed it.
though 1t Is worthy of consideration under
the state of the evidence. that upon cross
examination neither of them were able to
specify any time place where Stutler
gave them any such directions or where
they called 1t to his attention that thew
were doing the work and reporting in that
manner, except that Dubant did say that
Stutier mad told him that in the office at
his desk, but he gave no time.
Each one of these inspectors also test;
neo mat this has been customary ever since
tney nave been inspectors covering the
tlme from about the year 1885, and that it
was lnaugurated under the administrati on
OF former superintendent. and continued
office -' "eiioy oi the
Regarded as Fair PRESUMPTION.
In view of the fact that these inspectors
are unable to fix any time or place wbere
otutier gave any such Instructions Il &c
only lair to presume that the Instructions
they nave In mind are those received fror,
'ie superl4tendent under which the custono
ofisina'ed' Stutler denies that he had o,y
nnr w euse OF SUCH custom or of the man
ner OF doing the work and maltins th man al
ports until March last 'ie re-
fret 49, oue mat when the question was
t Isl raised On the 3Ist Of july This W., was
in the a eva Presented for the first time late
La IN
lation 10 1t before he had an onnortunit re-
ni,s the records and refreshing he
the inann, At that time he was Under
me impression that it was first ca,1oa e.
his attention In the sprine of 1oo oaiied 70
was called to his attention by a con,nIo,nt -
Ia ena. was made by citizen. which was re-.
lie, f t 10 MIN by Commissioner West and
leu 10 an investigation in which StutIe du
covered this custom, and StutIer 90 Stata,,
on the 31st of July, and referred 70 tho
papers as being the time when IT was first
81 tie o. 20 ms attention Several days after
the 5lst or July the papers were fonnd ana
appeared TO be dated in March, 1901 and In
the subsequent testimony given nv Stut,ar
ne STATED substantially that the papers re-
Ilesned ms recollection, and that he was
certain that he never heard Of tbe ro.t+a s
until March, 1904 but that a few davs after
tnat occurrence, and after he had Instruct
ed the inspectors that that custom must be
changed, and that they must not report a
schedule completed unless 1t was and to
cut out all that was not completed, one of
the inspectors, Gaddis, approached him with
aasunents mat 1t was better to do 1t In
accordance with the old custom as Ii was
very 1nconvenient to make the calculations
that would necessarily have to be made tn
snow what the contractor was entitled to.
and that in the end it amounted to the
same thing, as the contractor only got paid
for cleaning the alleys
From this Mr.. Stutler dissented, and in
sisted that the work should be done in
the regular way These were the two occa-
sions that Stutler had in mind when he tes-
titled on the 31st of July
Inspector Weir's Testimony.
In this connection attention is called to-
the fact that Weir, one of the inspectors,
he testified that as he understood
1t he had received Instructions from Stutler
to report the schedule as complete under
hereinbefore specified al
though not completed, also testified that
Stutler last spring directed them that it
would not do to have the work done in
that way, but that the inspectors said that
II was the only way it could be done to
avoid complaints coming in. That the or
der not to report a schedule completed I'M
less 1t was was given by Stutler in his of
nee last spring while they were In the
midst of doing the emergency work after
the spring opened. He also said that he
thought the other two inspectors were pres
ent when Stutler said they must not con-
t1nue to do the work in that way
Mr.. Mercer, the chief clerk in Suffers
office, also testified that he heard Stutler |
tell the inspectors that whenever sched- |
ule was not completed they must cut ont |
He also testified that In order to enable |
them to complete their schedules daily that |
recently rearrangemsnt of the schedules |
to others, SO as to make them as nearly |
equal as possible.
1.-THE evidence shows that the schedules |
oI aHeyS TO De cleaned by eacn or the IN |
spectorS are nearly equal as can be ar |
ranged, and that each has the same num-
Der of men. 1t will appear from an exam
nation of the reports of these inspectors |
from 1900 to 1903, both inclusive, immedi-
ately after. freezing weather, when clean
ng had been suspended for some time, that
both Weir and Gaddis cut out more area as
not cleaned than Dubant did.
IF Inspector Dubant Is correct In his evil
lence that he always deducted when he did |
1ot complete a schedule a comparison of
he reports. would seem to indicate that
Zach of the other inspectors did the same
,or If Dubant could complete his schedule
here is no reason why they could not COM
>lete theirs"
Alleged Conversion Of Material.
The fifteenth specification charged that
VT. Stutler has converted to his own US
(C<,r6fnred IN EYChth DaUo ( -